Mass Effect 2

This game was in my console the moment I finished the first one

Well, one thing that's instantly noticeable about this game is that the production quality is way up compared to the first one which is to be expected after the universal success of the first game and Bioware being bought by the notorious EA at the same time. I was apprehensive going into this game and seeing the Electronic Arts logo proudly flash up on the screen, but I don't think they really had so much of a massive effect on the game overall (see what I did there?)

As with most video game sequels, this game is much bigger than the first. The galaxy is bigger, the squad is bigger, the Normandy is bigger, the story-line is bigger. There are now more than a dozen star-systems you can travel to, which is way more than the few they had in the first game. Like the first game, most of them can't be landed on, but that's no surprise. The changes don't stop there. Mass Effect 2 is instantly recognizable when compared to Mass Effect. I respect a game that risks making changes like that, especially if the first game was successful already. Probably the most extreme example I can think of this was Assassin's Creed II which changed just about everything within the game possible without having it be a totally unrelated game.

All of the old characters from the first game make a comeback. It's disappointing to note that several of them play very minor roles in this game, Ashley Williams, Liara and Wrex all stay on their respective worlds and can only be interacted with via conversation. They just talk. I was a little disappointed finding that out but I got over it with the huge influx of new characters in this game.

Damn, son.

Most of them are just as intriguing as the ones from the first and some from the first are improved. One of the few characters I didn't much care for was the human, Miranda, who was kind of boring, but other than that they all get my approval. One of the ones I like more in this game is Joker as his character is elaborated on and he has much more to say.

Each character has a quest to recruit them along with a quest to gain their loyalty. I highly recommend doing every loyalty quest because while the rest of the game is largely unvaried combat, the loyalty quests are a great change of pace. One of my favorites of these was the Garrus quest. Through most of the game, your choices are somewhat black and white; you have the good guy way to do things and the bad guy way, but this one quest above the rest blurred the line between them and had me wondering weather the nice guy is always the right way.

The plot from this game is what you'd expect from the number 2 in a trilogy. It's the in-betweener, which is not a condemning thing to say about it. It's just the general rule for any number 2. It's less, for lack of a better word, epic than the other two. It's the necessary bridge between the first and third.That of course is not to say that this game is without action, in fact, I'd say it has more, but when you compare the first game's finale to this one's, the difference is clear.

I don't think it's a huge spoiler to say that Shepard basically dies right in the first cut scene of this game and is brought back to life by Cerberus during a process you soon find took a whopping two years.

Naturally, the characters from the first game have gone through many changes since then and seeing how they've developed is surprisingly rewarding to me. Garrus spent a lot of time doing mercenary work and thus is a more hardened and darker character than he was in the first. Liara has dropped her work on the Protheans and is completely absorbed by her obsession to find a villain called the Shadow Broker. Wrex has gone back to his home-world, Tuchunka, and is working on rebuilding it, and Tali is just Tali.

Fortunately, this game is much longer than the first whereas Mass Effect only took me fifteen hours, this one took me just under twenty-four. Testament to this is the fact that this game is stored on two discs. It's pretty rare to see that in games today and it makes you switch between them. It only told me to do so twice though, so don't be put off by the thought of having to move (God forbid).

Like I said before, this game is largely unvaried combat, which is a little disappointing. It's only slightly less tactical than the first game, which generally forced you into cover, this one, you can sometimes make do without it. One improvement over the combat of the first game is the way with which you manage your squad. In the first game you had several commands on your d-pad to tell your squad what to do, in this it's just a left or right tap to tell one of your squad members to go somewhere. It's simpler, much more straight forward and it works better. One thing I don't like all that much is the way health is displayed on your HUD. Shepard's health makes enough sense, but your squad's health is much more difficult to read. I liked it better in the first game where it was just bars. Don't fix it if it ain't broke as they say.

One of the major and instantly noticeable changes in combat is the fact that your weapons have ammo now whereas in the first game, they simply overheat after firing them in rapid succession. I'm still unsure over weather or not I prefer that to the first game. I don't like having to look around for ammunition as it sort of detracts from the main experience but it also forces me to use other weapons, which I like. I'm split.
One of the nice combat changes they made, when you try to get in cover near a squad-member, they'll intuitively get out of your way rather than just standing there and blocking the vantage point. Small detail, but a nice improvement.

Relationships with your crew matter more than ever in this game. Depending on how loyal they are to you, they'll have different abilities at their disposal that they can apply in combat. Just like the first game, you can take those normal relationships to the next level and become romantic with your squad-members. As far as that goes, there are many more options in this game compared to the first. In this one, Shepard can pretty much fuck anything that moves. I ended up with the Quarian, Tali, largely based on my curiosity over how that would even work. I've heard that in Mass Effect 3, Liara plays a much more central role, which makes me wonder how this love triangle is going to play out (hopefully, just as awkwardly as the Ashley/Liara one from the first one).

The sex scenes in this game are considerably less explicit than in the first game although, that too is none too surprising. The first game received a lot of public ridicule for it's 'graphic depiction of nudity and sodomy', which is somehow okay when it's in a movie with real people rather than a game with fake ones. Unfounded or not, it's a little disappointing to note that Bioware made that change, not because I want to see the sex scene but because it shows that Bioware will give in to that kind of reprobation. It bodes poorly for the future, but I doubt that Bioware would change anything that's not so controversial based solely on the public's bullshitting.

Technically speaking, this game has made great strides over the first. Expectantly  the graphics are a huge leap over the previous game and look amazing. Many of the issues that caused my bitching present in the first game are absent. For instance, the game's autosave feature is a massive improvement. Never once did I find myself frustrated over how far I was sent back after death, it worked just as well as I'd hoped it would.

Another great change is the navigation. With the first game, I would often find myself lost and running around aimlessly, hoping I had arbitrarily picked the correct way. Finding out where you need to go was a bother and it was all just kind of a mess. With this game, you can bring the map on the screen just by clicking the control stick. The map by the way is a huge improvement. Everything is labeled and it's shown all on one screen. No more panning around. If you don't want to look at the map you can click the control stick and have a little directional navigator pop up on your mini-map and remind you which way you need to go. Exactly what I'd asked for when I did the first review. How these two controls, the map and the navigator are on the same button, I'm not sure and I can't really describe how to differentiate, but I didn't have any issue. The nav is a little finicky and can be hard to follow, as it often freaks out and points you in strange directions, but any change over the first is a big upgrade.

Another nice change is the hacking process. The first game had you pushing specified buttons in rapid succession, but this game gives you two different kinds of hacking. One has you connecting matching symbols on a computer chip as fast as you can, the other has you selecting specified coding from a mass of scrambled codes within a time limit. It's much more fun and it's a much more creative idea.

The tank controls aren't in this one at all as that portion of the gameplay was taken out, for better or for worse. I can't say I miss it much, it was kind of useless to be driving around nearly barren planets like that, but it did succeed at changing up the gameplay once in awhile. Oh well.

Unfortunately, this game is much glitchier than it's predecessor and not the fun kind of glitchy. For a game that I'd expect to be riddled with glitches, Mass Effect hardly had any to speak of. Early in this game, I found that I couldn't advance through a level any further, simply because the game forgot to initiate that part somehow. I ended up having to restart the entire level, but it never happened again after that.

One of the strangest glitches I've ever seen was a recurring one in this game. Occasionally, when a character would speak during a level, their voice would get all distorted and slowed down. It took me forever to figure out what was causing this, but I found that it had something to do with weather or not I was sprinting at the time of the dialogue. I have no idea how that kind of glitch could exist and I've never seen anything like it before. It's funny until you realize that you're missing important dialogue and you don't know what to do.

Another weird thing that happens with the dialogue occasionally, is that certain things will get mixed up a little. When I did Miranda's quest, I naturally learned a great deal about her character and she acted kind of romancy towards me, but through conversations with her subsequent to that, she would tell me things I already knew and Shepard would act like he didn't know and she had brought the relationship back to square one (not that I cared).

There was one instance during a pivotal scene in a loyalty quest, where the sound cut out entirely. And no, it was not a technical issue on my part, bringing up the Xbox menu still prompted the little sound. Several seconds later, it randomly came back all at once. It never happened again, but it was weird nonetheless.

I don't much care for the new method of leveling up in this one. It's much less clear when you have ascended to a new level in this game whereas in the first one it just told you with a non-obtrusive message that would flash up on the screen. Here I never know, I just periodically check it. I also don't like the way you distribute skill points. In the first one, you could just put points wherever you wanted under one skill, but here you have to add more and more points to successively level the same skill. It's just over-complicating and I like having the freedom of the first and not having to stock points up.

Other than that, the only real complaint I can make is that I had some issues with taking cover during gunplay. It's a little finicky and it got me killed more than once, but it's not that big of an issue.

So is this game as good as the first one? Yes. Is it better? I'd say yes, but it'd be by a small margine. If you liked the first one, you'll like this one. Due to the increase in action and lesser focus on being tactical, this game comes off as being slightly less intelligent than the first game, however I may just think that because I now already know the galaxy from my previous experiences.

As with any major design changes to a game I like, I was at first put off by the differences between the two, but I accept them both for what they are and they're both very, very good.

Can't wait to start number 3.

9.5/10 - Very good. Check it out.

Mass Effect

My first formal game review! Hooray!

A little while ago, I was gifted the Mass Effect Trilogy box set. I had never played Mass Effect before, not even in a demo or at a friend's house. Not for any real reason, I didn't have some sort of vendetta against this game, I just never got into it. Well, anyway I promptly started on the first game and I felt compelled to try my hand at giving it a review because I've been wanting to do some game reviews and this seemed like as good a place to start as any.

 I'm writing this fresh off of completing the game; seriously, the credits are rolling past the screen as I type this at 4:30 in the morning. My first impression after my fifteen hour commitment was very positive. Yeah, I actually liked it a lot. Matter of fact, I'm a little ticked I never bought it sooner.

It's a pretty ingenious idea. Take facets from other games that people like and combine them. If I had to describe this game to someone who's never played it, I'd say, 'kinda like if Halo and The Elder Scrolls had a baby.' I think that's a pretty accurate way to summarize it. It takes the action and linear style from Halo, not to mention space and all those aliens, and it takes the choice-making, side-quests, lore style, skill-honing and (sort of) open world from The Elder Scrolls. I love it.

As for the choice-making in this game, it's a little limited, but only when you're talking about big choices. It's not a very long game, like I said, it only took me fifteen hours (and I fell asleep in front of the game for a few hours one night) and there are only a few choices that will majorly effect the rest of the game within that span. The smaller choices you make, e.g. who to take places and what to say, are incredibly entertaining. It always seemed that no matter who I took where, the cinematic quality was never lost; it always seemed like that character was supposed to be there to influence the game in such a way. Really cool.

And obviously you always have the choice of what to say. Never once do you have just one single option that the game forces you to take, you always get to pick from a few. Those choices will influence the conversation, your relationship with the character in the long run and possibly trigger certain events to occur in the longer run. For instance, the game allows you to be involved in relationships with characters, if you play your cards right.

It's kind of funny how much of a dick the game will allow you to be at times, but I often found myself inclined to be nice to everyone because I actually liked all of the characters. When I say that I like a character in a movie, game, book, whatever; what I typically mean is that the character interests me and I enjoy their screen time (I've been scolded for saying I like the murderous villain countless times), it's pretty rare, especially in movies today, for me to say that I like every character but in this case, I do. That definitely goes to show that this game is well written.

Speaking of that, the writing of the storyline itself is very good. Really unique idea that I will refrain from spoiling. The whole game is really story driven and plays out cinematically, much like a movie. If I had had prior knowledge of this game at the time, I certainly would've added it to my list of games that could be made into great movies. Aside from that, there are a few dozen side-quests that you can complete if you get tired of the main story. In my play through, I really didn't do many of those, but completing all or most of them would certainly add a few hours onto the total play time.
Also very cool is the intricacy of the game. It's much like The Elder Scrolls again where there's just so much to this world you're in that it's almost daunting. There're all sorts of bizarre, otherworldly species, all complete with history and stories and very planet your come across has all sorts of technical and political information, which only adds to the believability of this unbelievable universe.

The game also gives you many options in shaping your character. The face of Shepard that everybody knows is merely the default choice if you're for, whatever reason, too lazy to customize it. So, your lead character would look completely different from my lead character, much like any Bethesda game. It gives you the choice to give your character a name, but it really doesn't matter much because everyone will refer to you as Shepard anyway. It's just your first name and it's just for display.

You also have the ability to choose your backstory, personality type, combat type and you have ability customization. Like any RPG, you get points when you level up and those points can be put into your skills as you see fit. You do this with all of your squad members as well.

The combat in this game is very interesting. It's much more tactical than your run-of-the-mill shooter. It takes awhile to get used to, along with the items you'll have to be swapping out and the upgrades you get for them. It's daunting at first, but you get used to it. You'll find yourself taking cover, directing your squad members and using power ups and special techniques rather than just blindly running in, guns blazing, which is a good way to get yourself killed instantly in this game. You don't have a great deal of health and it only take a few direct hits to get a "CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE" message flashing up on the screen. This is one area where the game has a major flaw. Not in the combat, but in the way death is handled or rather saving. The fact is, it doesn't save nearly as often as it should. You have the option to save manually, but a lot of times, it's not there. You can't save when there are enemies in the area and when you're in the heat of a level and you're triumphantly running off to the next encounter after wasting a few dozen Geth, you're not always going to remember to go into the start menu and save and besides it's a bother. In games like Halo, it automatically saves after every battle so you won't be wasting time repeating something you've already beaten. I can't tell you how many times I was throwing my controller in frustration after losing twenty plus minutes of gameplay.

As I said before, you have sort of free roam in this game. The level never points you where to go, which is cool until you lose track of where you're going and spend all kinds of time wandering around, hoping you're going the right way. You always have your map in the start menu and it displays your objective, but if your objective is somewhere outside of the area, it won't display any such waypoint. A little arrow on the minimap would be nice, but instead you'll find yourself going from your map and then to your journal and then back to your map just to try and figure out where the fuck you're supposed to be.
The game explores all sorts of exotic planets and places throughout the galaxy, the coolest being the Citadel located somewhere in deep space.

Walking around that is interesting. All of those branches are part of a sprawling futuristic city and while you can't go to all of it, traversing what you can is pretty fun.
The rest of the galaxy is filled largely with unremarkable planets most of which you can't land on, which is a bit of a tease. When you can land on them, most of them are barren wastelands but there's generally a point of interest somewhere on it. You explore the planet in a large, six-wheeled tank-like vehicle called the Mako. The only thing I don't like about this process, is that the controls for the Mako are kinda awkward. It's fine if you're just driving straight, but if you want to turn around, you might have some issues especially if you're in an enclosed area or fighting... or both.

I highly recommend this game. It's a great experience that created a unique play-style that I've never seen done in any other game. The story and characters are great and the last act of the game is so fucking incredible that I was literally on the edge of my seat with my eyes glued to the screen (that part wasn't literal). I think this is a great example of the intelligence a videogame can display and sticks out like a beacon of hope for the gaming industry amidst the bullshit like CoD.
I'll give this game a 9/10 simply because, while it certainly is great, it has room for improvement and I expect to see that when I start up the next game.

9/10 - Very good. Check it out.

A Good Day to Die Hard

You may remember my mentioning this

Last month, when I published the article about most anticipated films for 2013, I had said that I'd do my best to go and see each film on that list. Well, A Good Day to Die Hard was on that list and it just came out on friday. I went to see it just a few hours ago and decided I may as well get the review over with.

Let me first start by saying that just prior to seeing the movie, I made the idiotic decision to take a glimpse at the ratings the movie was getting by critics on the internet. I was daunted by the horrible reviews it had garnered on sites like Rotten Tomatoes which gave it a disheartening one star. After seeing the movie, I can definitely say that that's way over-the-top. I'll give you my opinion on the film.

It's not as good as Live Free or Die Hard, not by a long shot. I didn't expect it to be, don't you expect it to be. For one thing, I'm not a big fan of Jack, John McClane's son in this movie. As far as being a sidekick goes, he's not at all on par with Justin Long from Live Free, who is unfortunately, absent from this movie. I don't know why he's not in it, I would've liked to at least see him have a few lines somewhere along the line. Long's dorky awkwardness perfectly coincided with McClane's brutish atitude and watching them scrape by the bad guys was very entertaining. Here, the two are kind of boring together, the personalities don't bounce off of each other humorously, they just exist.
In fact, other than Bruce Willis, the whole cast is pretty weak. The lead villain isn't even in the same world as the past ones such as Alan Rickman and Timothy Olyphant who were fantastic in their roles. The bad guys don't interest me. I don't care about their motives, I don't care about them in general, I don't even really want to see them dead because I found that I just didn't really care.
Besides the two leads and the bad guys, there really aren't any other characters. Why not? All of the other movies had a bunch of good guys, hell even Die Hard 2 was better in that respect.

At 90 minutes, the movie felt pretty short. It doesn't feel like it's rushed or anything, it just feels like there isn't enough plot to span it out any longer, like the plot is just an excuse for some action (Speaking of which, I'm not going to give away the plot, but I will say don't expect much). It's not anywhere near as interesting as the convoluted plot from the third one, it's not unique as the hacker one from the fourth one and it's not as simple as the thieves from the first one. It's just not very good. It was kind of weird, watching this movie. It was so unlike the other ones where there's all this stuff going on and development and whatever, this movie just kind of happened all at once (which is kind of hard to understand, but if you see it, you'll know what I mean).
I'm kind of against the idea of having it take place in Russia, whereas all of the previous ones were set in America. Yeah, maybe it was time for a change of pace, but it just kind of makes it stick out from the other ones.

Despite all of that, the action itself is amazing, It starts off strong with a crazy car chase that leaves dozens of vehicles in ruin and covers a lot of land. It's a great scene and had me on the edge of my seat. From there the action is all awesome too, but you may notice, as I did, that there's something curiously missing from it...
I think I figured out what it was. Much of what Die Hard and movies like it (e.g. 007) are all about at the core is taking the character, putting them in a situation where their survival is impossible and seeing how they survive. For instance, how the hell do you take out a helicopter with a car?

That's how.

The Die Hard movies are full of these. How do you get out of a pitch black highway tunnel? How do you get off of an exploding rooftop? How do you fight a jet with a truck? How do you kill an asian ninja bitch? (The answer is an SUV to the elevator shaft) A Good Day to Die Hard was largely absent of these moments, all of the action was just action. Shootouts and whatever else. If you changed the characters, it'd probably be completely unrecognizable as a Die Hard flick. The style just isn't there.
Everything flows so perfectly in the other ones like the way the Terminator statue falls on the delete button causing an explosion that kills the bad guy in Live Free. That was set up so well, y'know? You have that moment where you realize what's about to happen and you just lose your shit everywhere. I love that. That's Die Hard.

After all that, you probably think I hated it, but I didn't. I think it was still better than Die Hard 2, but I also think it could've been much better. Bruce Willis is still good in this movie and, like I said before, the action is great. This one is back to an R rating, as it should be, leaving Live Free or Die Hard as the only one with a PG-13 rating. Not that I have some sort of hardon for the word "fuck", but it's just not Die Hard if they're not dropping F-bombs all over the place. Fortunately, there is an unrated version of Live Free that includes all the violence and language, but it would be better if it were on the standard release rather than trying to pander to a larger audience by toning it down (PG-13 movies do better commercially than R). Besides, to my knowledge, it's not available on Blu-Ray and movies like Die Hard are much better when in high-definition.

As far as that one-star rating goes, I think the reviewer was in the wrong mindset. You can't go into a Die Hard movie expecting a riveting, multifaceted plot and in-depth characters; you go into a Die Hard movie to laugh at the jokes, cheer at the one-liners and gape at the action. People these days seem to be incapable of changing their mindsets and on a related note, suspending their disbelief. That's kind of depressing to me because when you limit yourself like that and don't allow open-mindedness, you miss out on a lot of great movies. I know people who I can't get to watch Studio Ghibli movies because they immediately dismiss it as "too weird" and drop it, not knowing they're missing out on a compelling story. The same goes for anime, people won't watch high-brow shows like Death Note or Fullmetal Alchemist just because it's anime. They instantly assume it's all

Which is great, don't get me wrong.

Not knowing it's more intelligent and engaging than 90% of the shit on American TV.

But anyway the movie was pretty decent, check it out if you have nothing better to do but it's not worth canceling your wedding over.

5.5/10 - Flawed but decent overall.

Why The Grammys Are Bullshit

I've just gotta post about this right now.

Okay, I'm watching the Grammys right now and I'm raging quite hard and I need to write it or I'll go fucking insane.

First of all, I find the idea of criticizing music professionally is stupid as hell. Music is entirely based on taste and opinion. There's no science behind it, it's art. Therefore, the idea of pitting music artists and singles against each other in a contest, to me is absurd. Especially considering that they never tell you what the criteria for the quality of a song is the entire time. Is it popularity? Talent? Innovation and progressiveness? Who the fuck knows?

Besides, the Grammys aren't even really about the music, the talent or even the artists. It's all about the publicity. I just watched a nail polish commercial that somehow had ties to the Grammys.

But all of these complaints pale in comparison to the main reason I have such a disdain for the Grammys. The main thing I hate is the narrow-mindedness with which the awards are awarded. They take, largely, just one genre (pop) and say "fuck you" to everything else. Pop is such a small section of the music industry and is easily the one with the least talent. There is seriously no way to argue that. What are the priorities of pop artists?

1. Money

2. Attractiveness

3. Image

4. Actual fucking talent

There's no way that anyone could believe that the Grammys is based on talent considering Wiz Kalifa, who may be one of the worst popular rap artists of the past decade, just did a song... seriously.

Now, I fancy myself an elitist metal fan, but that doesn't mean that I don't have respect for an artist I think is talented or is doing something new and progressive (provided it's not awful). Now, because of my taste, I'm obviously not very well represented at the awards and by "not well", I mean, not at all. There are entire genres of music that the Grammys just feels it can neglect. That is such a load of shit to me. Why should the same, already insanely popular celebrities be continuously awarded things year after year?  Especially when it's the genre with the least skill! Seriously, it's almost over at the time of this writing and I've seen some artists up here probably four fucking times.

Now, I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but how could I not get pissed off by this? If anything, they should award lesser known groups more. The only movie awards that ignore all but the ridiculously popular are those shitty "you decide!' ones that no one actually takes seriously (the MTV movie awards gave all five Twilight films "Best Picture").

Furthermore, it seems to me that the Grammys has a hardon for singers and pretty much nothing else. You might say, 'There were plenty of groups that had instruments up there!' which is true. But did you see any bands that were completely instrumental? No. You didn't because there were none. If anything, the ones on the instruments should get more recognition than the singers. Most of the people who can sing just happened to win the genetic lottery and were endowed with a majestic voice by pure luck and that was that. But the ones playing the instruments had to spend years and years of their life practicing in order to master it. Why then ignore them? Because anyone can sing along to a song, but most people can't relate to playing an instrument. Y'see, the pop genre is literally programmed to get as many people to like it as possible. It exists for no other purpose than making money. Don't believe me? Well, pop music is actually designed and written in order to stimulate as many pleasure centers in the brain as possible. If you're like me, you're not happy when you're listening to pop, but you're chemically happy regardless. The tunes and lyrics are simple so they'll get stuck in your head and they're always named after the artist so you'll remember the person and not anything else. It's all about the image.

But back to poor representation, it's absurd to think that just because one genre is more mainstream (because popular may not be the right word) than another is no reason to ignore the ability of the artists in that genre. It's not like these genres have small fanbases, I know for a fact that metal has a fucking huge fanbase. So, why then do they feel it's okay to just pretend that it doesn't exist? I don't fucking know.

Of course now that I think about it, if they ever put metal on the Grammys, perhaps to silence the, presently, silent metal fanbase, it'd be shitty teenybopper punk-metal that middle schoolers listen to because they think they're hardcore in which case, it may actually be worse.

I raged. Yes, I mad. Rant fucking over.

Skyfall

Just realized that I never did a formal review of this movie

What was I thinking, not doing a review of Skyfall? Well, I'll attempt it now anyway.

I did see this movie in the theatre and it recently came out DVD, so I had another chance to see it. As far as the action aspect goes, this movie is awesome. It's brimming with fantastic stunts right from the get-go. In standard Bond fashion, the action starts immediately and damn is it awesome. There's a great stunt where Bond drives a motorcycle over a bridge onto a moving train. Shit was cash. A lot of the hand to hand combat scenes were done free-flow, all in one take, which is a trend I've seen in a few movies now, for instance, The Book of Eli. I love it. I can't imagine all of the work it would take to choreograph that to get it all in one shot. And hey! This movie used CG right! That gives it my seal of approval!

The acting was awesome too. I've become a fan of Daniel Craig over the past several years so, it's always nice to see him. Judi Drench as M is great in this movie and, in my opinion, is the best she's ever been out of the times she played M. Ralph Fiennes, who you may recognize as Voldemort, plays a smaller role than the other actors, but gives a great performance as always. But the actor who steals the show, is Javier Bardem as the insane and eccentric Silva, who is the lead villain. You may recognize him as the also insane role he played in No Country for Old Men, Anton Chiguhr.

He is absolutely phenomenal in this movie. I think he was better in this movie than he was in No Country for Old Men. There's something about the way he says every line that he comes off as actually being quite funny. There were several scenes that had the audience laughing in the theatre, but I won't give any of it away.

This movie is unlike the other bond movies in the sense that, it explores the character Bond much more than the previous installments. What we have in this movie is an imperfect Bond. He makes mistakes, he doesn't get the girl, he's not the 100% perfect and suave killer that he's often portrayed as. He's only human. The line of work that he leads would take it's toll on anyone and it does to Bond, both physically and emotionally. Along with that, it's also the only 007 movie to give some serious backstory on Bond, but again, I won't give any of it away.

I'd say that this one was a huge improvement over Quantum of Solace, which I thought was pretty far down on the list of best 007 movies. When I first saw Skyfall, I thought that it was inferior to Casino Royale, but on a second viewing, I think I would alter that statement and say that Skyfall is the better film. The acting is great, the action is great and it goes where no other Bond film has gone before. On another random note, I really like the name, Skyfall. It kind of stands out when you compare it to other Bond movie titles such as the other two in this new trilogy, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. It's cool.

It's too difficult to think about exactly where this would go right now, but I think this would have to be somewhere within the top 5 007 movies of all time. It's a great film and I highly recommend it, even for a non-fan. There were scenes in the movie where the audience laughed, cheered and was captivated into dead silence. Only a great movie can do that and this movie is just that. I don't think it would be a stretch to say that this is my favorite movie to have come out in 2012.

10/10 Amazing. Do not miss this movie.

Top 8 Potential Videogame-Based Movies

If you're a video game fan

Then you must know how disappointing it is to wait and wait for your favorite title to be adapted, only to have it be done by Disney or star Angelina Jolie (i.e. suck major dicks). I can't think of any video game movie that left me not pissed off much less satisfied. This happens for many different reasons. A lot of times, it's just because the game doesn't have a lot of plot to it. Mortal Kombat isn't exactly known for it's rich storytelling and yet they attempted it nonetheless. Other times, it's because the game has too much plot. This is often the case with adventure games and RPGs especially. Seriously, try to cram an Elder Scrolls game into two hours. Not easy.

Another issue is that the directors and generally everyone involved in the filmmaking process, were not part of the generation that played the games therefore, they don't have any real respect for it. Of course there are less excusable reasons as well. Sometimes, it's just because the filmmakers had no understanding of the game at all and were simply too damn lazy to ask the creators or the fans and just gave it their own interpretation. And of course, there are the douchebags who just cash in on the name of the franchise and don't even try.

I'll be damned if this man so much as touches a fan-fiction.

But at any rate, weather or not game-based movies can be done well, I've compiled a list of what I think are the games with the best potential to be done well. Not saying any of them should be adapted just because of that rant up there, but if it's ever attempted, it'd damn-well better be someone who knows what they're doing. I'm going to exclude the ones that are absurdly obvious, e.g. Alan Wake, considering it's practically a movie as it is. Let's go.

8. Dead Space

I think Dead Space could be adapted into a pretty respectable sci-fi/horror movie as well. I think it could be done well if put in the right hands. It'd certainly be an edge of your seat thriller... oh yeah, it'd have to be gory as hell, otherwise, I wouldn't accept it.

7. Bioshock

And while I'm on the subject of horror games, this was one that got rumored a ton a year or so ago (maybe two). It could be made into a very good suspense/thriller/horror movie and it has a unique and interesting plot that's much more intelligent than most of the movies coming out these days. I'd see it.

6. Metroid

Who could say that this wouldn't be awesome? A tightass space bounty-hunter flies around on her ship and fucks up gnarly looking aliens. That has Hollywood written all over it. The main issue with making this movie would be getting the rights. Nintendo is really stingy with that sort of thing; I've read about what the guys down at Wreck-It Ralph had to go through, but if those rights could be acquired, it'd be a bitchin' movie. I think having Nintendo breathing down the filmmakers necks, as they tend to do, would actually help in this situation. No one wants to see a Mario Movie made out of Metroid. This movie is actually being rumored about right now, I hear. I've learned to ignore rumors because they're typically too good to be true, but you never know...

5. Halo

Yeah, you must've known that was coming. I remember this was rumored to be released in 2007 and it seemed pretty legit from the online hype and garnered some mention in some gaming magazines. I got really excited and then 2007 came around and nothing. I think that Halo has one of the best plots in it's genre, as far as shooters go. If anything, it'd make a badass summer blockbuster that would annihilate the box office. But who would ever think that making one of the most popular gaming franchises into a movie would be a good idea? And yes I know "H" is a stupid name, these posters aren't too easy to find, y'know what I'm dealing with here?

Yeah.

4. Uncharted

Remember when you could look forward to an Indiana Jones movie? Crystal Skull was a let down, for sure, but that doesn't mean that that style of movie can never be reproduced. Meet Uncharted. A game that is, at the core, very much Indiana Jones inspired and it's got a great and dramatic plot to boot. It'd certainly make for an memorable adventure movie.

3. Assassin's Creed

This series definitely falls into the category of having an overwhelmingly complicated and large plot, but I think it could be done very well if handled with care. Start with the first one, which would be the easiest. It has the least plot development, but it's gritty and suspenseful. If/when they ever made a second one, then that'd be where the plot really picks up. Maybe try to merge ACII with Brotherhood? It just takes some careful writing. It's all a matter of deciding what can be left out and what can't. Then you work from there.

 2. Mass Effect

I just published my Mass Effect article and mentioned that I would've certainly put it on this list had I had prior knowledge of the game at the time of it's writing. Thankfully, with the internet, I can edit this article and throw this in. Mass Effect is already a very cinematic game so, adapting it to a movie wouldn't be all that difficult. Just cut out much of the quests but keep the core storyline, with Saren and whatnot, intact. Also, keep the finale exactly the same. It was badass as hell. This would, of course, be the first of a trilogy which would make great summer blockbusters, if nothing else.

1. The Legend of Zelda

Duh. Of course. No shit. Obviously.

How could I not put LoZ here? The iconic series of games could be easily adapted into what could be an unforgettable fantasy film. I don't think anyone would want anything other than the main candidate for the source material to be The Ocarina of Time. That would be my choice too. It wouldn't be extremely hard to adapt, it's a very (very) unique plot, and it's probably the most beloved of all of the games. You don't have to look far to see all kinds of shit like that poster there surrounding this movie that probably will never exist. There are even entire fake trailers that have been made.

If you think about it, there are so many distinguished moments and scenes from OoT alone to make a movie. The Deku Tree, the Time Chamber, pulling the Master Sword, the Ocarina ect. Yeah, you could cut out a lot with all of that medallion collecting shit and probably all of the children quests if need be, and fill it with whatever else, it really doesn't matter much as long as the core story is the same and the iconic moments are still there... and of course it's important that it resembles the  games, I know this, non-existent commenters. Unfortunately, like Metroid, Nintendo would not sacrifice the rights to Zelda so easily, you'd have to convince the shit out of them. If the cards were played right and it was done by a true fan, The Legend of Zelda could very well be one of the greats of cinema.

Tying this all together...

It's hard to imagine a videogame-based movie being critically praised and going down in history but there's no reason to say that it's not possible. Movies are based off of other things most of the time anyway, hell they once based an entire movie off of a commercial. My point is, is that the only thing that's holding us back from achieving that goal of a great videogame movie is doubt and a lack of respect and appreciation for games which can and should be held to the same standards of cinema or literature. They're all just ways of expressing a compelling story and there's no good reason why mixing them won't work.

Pictured: A compelling story